Skip to main content
Glama

Greenhouse Ops Control Plane

by app.vercel.ats-ops-control-plane-gateway

deprecate_offer_draft

Deprecate a created-status draft offer in Greenhouse. Refuses accepted or rejected offers and supports preview.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe offer ID to deprecate
reasonYesHuman-readable audit reason for this change. Must be at least 12 characters.
dry_runNoWhen true, validate and preview the change without sending a write request.
confirm_offer_patchYesMust be true to deprecate a draft offer.
on_behalf_of_user_idYesGreenhouse user ID to send with this write.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions preview support and refusal of non-drafts, but does not explain if deprecation is reversible, what happens to related records, or whether it is destructive. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no wasted words, but could be more structured to separate purpose, constraints, and features. Efficient but not perfectly formatted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, 5 parameters, and no annotations, the description covers the main action and preview feature but omits important context like return value, side effects, and the confirm_offer_patch safety mechanism. Adequate but with gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond schema—only tying 'supports preview' to the dry_run parameter. Other parameters are adequately described in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'deprecate' and the specific resource 'created-status draft offer', distinguishing it from siblings like create_offer_draft or patch_offer_*.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions it 'refuses accepted or rejected offers', which implies it should only be used for drafts. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Greenhouse Ops Control Plane toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

With 87 tools, there is potential for confusion among similar list tools (e.g., list_candidates vs list_applied_candidate_tags), but each tool targets a distinct entity or action, and descriptions provide enough clarity to differentiate them.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using lowercase with underscores (e.g., list_jobs, get_application, patch_candidate_profile). No mixing of styles or irregular conventions.

Tool Count1/5

At 87 tools, the count is extremely high for a single server, exceeding the 50+ threshold for extreme mismatch. While the domain is broad, the number of tools is likely to overwhelm agents and dilute focus.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers a wide range of operations (list, get, patch, add, remove, upsert) across many entities, but lacks basic CRUD for core objects like jobs and candidates (no create_job or create_candidate), leaving notable gaps.

Resources